text:
WAI: Strategies, guidelines, resources to make the Web accessible to people with disabilities
Site Navigation: W3C Home > WAI Home > UAWG Home
This is a working document from the User Agent Accessibility Guidelines Working Group (UAWG) that details action taken on the 125 issues received from 5 commenters on the working drafts of 23 May 2013 of UAAG 2.0 and Implementing UAAG 2.0. The table includes relevent text from UAAG 2.0 and Implementing UAAG 2.0; the classification of the comment, the UAWG response, and whether the commenter agreed with the change. There may also be highlighted text in the Response column whether or not the change has been accepted into the latest Editors' Draft.
See also:
UAAG 2.0 Working Draft of 23 May 2013
Implementing UAAG 2.0 Working Draft of 23 May 2013
List of Substantive Changes to UAAG 2.0 Last Call Working Draft
Priority | Guidelines and Success Criteria | Comments | Type | Response | Disposition | Acknowledgement |
Overall | JF1: I believe that UAAG would have more impact if it employed RFC 2119 language, over vaguer instructions such as "can" and "it is recommended". |
substantive |
JF1 [@@done] - Action-861 Added a note to clarify that guidelines do not use RFC language. |
Alternative Action Taken |
Definition of Compliance Level | AR1: It isn't fair or indicative if a user agent is genuinely compliant in all AA or AAA criteria yet has to be regarded as non-compliant overall if only one level A criteria is non-compliant. This is another reason why exemptions for platform limitation changes should not just include hardware and OS, but the development platform where the author is not the user agent's vendor. |
substantive | AR1 [@@done]Action-846 UAWG accepts that the wording for platform limitations was too narrow. Instead we will link to the definition of "platform" which includes host user agents, cross-OS environments (e.g. Java). However, the group also feels that the platform limitation should not extend to poor choices of UI component toolkits so this has been clarified in the definition of platform. |
Partial Accept |
Overall Implementing Document | EO1: Carefully consider what information should be in UAAG proper, and what should be in Implementing UAAG. Once UAAG is done, it cannot be changed; however, Implementing can be updated. Therefore, it might be wise to move some of the information from the Into of UAAG to Implementing. EO2: Would the sections on Relationships to ATAG and WCAG be better in the Implementing document? |
editorial | EO1 & EO2: [@@done] |
accepted proposal | ||
Overall (both) | EO3: Also, is there a reason why the "Guidelines" heading and each of the "Principles" headings are all at heading level H2? |
question | EO3: [@@done] |
proposal not accepted |
Overall (Implementing) | EO23: (Implementing) Would it be possible to use structuring elements such as H5s to indicate sections like Intent of SC, Examples and resources? While comparing to the structure of Understanding WCAG 2.0, is there a W3C graphical design that could make each guideline document look similar? |
editorial question |
EO23:[@@done] WCAG differs from W3C stylesheet, UAWG is closer. |
accepted proposal not accepted |
Overall (Implementing) | EO24: (Implementing) Examples: change some of the names to be more diverse |
editorial | EO24: [not done] Kim will generate new names for Implementing UAAG 2.0 document as we continue work on Implementing. |
accepted proposal |
Overall (Implementing) | EO25: (Implementing) CSS to add more space between chunks of text, especially more space above new SC. Also, increase leading throughout. |
editorial | EO25:[@@done] |
accepted proposal |
Overall (Implementing) | EO26: (Implementing) change "Return to Guideline" to @@ |
editorial | EO26:[@@done]discussed with Shawn for exact proposal |
accepted proposal |
Accepted 20130916 | |
Abstract |
EO4: Second sentence in abstract: |
editorial | EO4: [@@ done] browsers, media players and applications |
accepted proposal |
Abstract | EO5: Second paragraph, second sentence: "technologies for braille rendering) will be essential to ensuring Web access for some users with disabilities." |
editorial | EO5: [@@ done](e.g. assistive technologies for braille rendering) |
accepted proposal |
Abstract | EO6: Third paragraph, has a couple of errors in the acronyms: "the W3C" has "W3C" expanded to "the World Wide Web Consortium", so the word "the" is in both plain and title text (this happens elsewhere on the page too); "Web Accessibility Initiative" is written in full but its acronym is also expanded (incorrectly), so the output is "Web Accessibility Initiative the Web Access Initiative". |
editorial | EO6 [done] |
accepted proposal |
Abstract | EO7: First paragraph: it's not clear to me what "...and through other internal facilities..." means |
editorial | EO7 [@@ done]removed phrase |
accepted proposal |
Introduction | EO8: "This section is informative." Should change this to a header: "Informative Section". Other alternatives: reword it to "The section that follows is informative or add a colon so that readers know what follows is information. Otherwise, it's not clear cwhat "this" means - does it refer to the section that follows or the section that the hyperlink points to? |
editorial | EO8 [@@ done]reworded |
accepted proposal |
Overview | EO9: Suggest changing: "Accessibility involves a wide range of disabilities." to "Accessibility involves consideration of a wide range of disabilities." |
editorial | EO9 [@@ done] |
accepted proposal |
Overview | EO10: May be the Working Group can bring more clarifications on the second sentence of follwoing paragraph, give an example of features concerned: |
substantive | EO10 & EO11: [@@ done] added note in 4.1 |
partial accepted |
EO11: The fourth paragraph seems like it could be a set of bullet points:
In such cases, UAAG 2.0 assumes that features required by UAAG 2.0 will be built on top of an underlying security architecture. " |
editorial | EO11: [@@ done] see EO10. The paragraph was changed to a one sentence Note in Guideline 4.1 | Not Accepted | |||
Layers of Guidance | EO12: I would link from the 3 bullet items - Principles, Guidelines, Success Criteria - to where readers can read the specifics of each of these items - i.e. where they can read the 5 "principles" |
editorial | EO12: [@@ done] There was no section with generic explanations to link to. We added more explanation and listed the 5 Principles. |
alternative action taken |
Layers of Guidance | EO: 13: The Principles bullet should read, "At the top layer,"... Omitting the word layer caused me to trip while reading Principles 4 and 5 are new and need more than just naming. The meaning of facilitate programmatic access and comply with specifications and conventions is not clear, and a brief description does not appear for a very long time. Please give each a brief description when they first appear. |
editorial | EO13 [@@ done] More explanation was added for all Principles |
alternative action taken |
Layers of Guidance | EO14: Perhaps a nested list would help too because separation (and therefore an understanding) of principles 4 and 5 is complicated by the need to use the word "and" twice so closely together. On first reading this sounded like one principle to me. |
editorial | EO14 [@@ done] [ proposal] Action- 856 A nested list was added. |
Proposal Accepted |
Layers of Guidance | EO15: The three different levels of conformance are not obvious to read, in particular level A. The way it is written, it makes believe that there is a highest level whereas the highest level is called A. therefore, it may be helpful to write that the lowest level is called A and the highest is called AAA. |
substantive | EO15 [@@ done] [proposal] Action- 849 UAWG did not change "lowest/highest" to stay consistent with WCAG, but we added "basic"to A and "recommended" to AA. |
Partial Accept | ||
Layers of Guidance | EO16: First paragraph includes the following items "...explanatory intent, examples and resource links." The way this section is written, I expected these items to have their own bullet points. If these items don't get their own bullets (or possibly are meant to be included under the bullet "success criteria"), then the first paragraph needs to be rewritten to reflect this meaning. For example, this paragraph might read: In order to meet the needs of different audiences using UAAG, several layers of guidance are provided, including overall principles, general guidelines and testable success criteria. Each layer may include explanatory intent, examples and resource links. |
substantive | EO16 [@@ done] [proposal] Action- 849 UAWG accepted with additional clarification that they are in a separate document. | Accepted Proposal | ||
UAAG 2.0 Supporting Documents | EO17: (referred to as the "Implementing document" from here on) should probably read as (hereafter referred to as the "Implementing document") | editorial | EO17 [@@ done] | Accepted Proposal | ||
Components of Web Accessibility | EO18: As this section directly references ATAG and WCAG, perhaps it should be followed by the sections that explain the relationship between UAAG and the other two sets of guidelines. Perhaps even move the "Relationship" sections into the Implementing document and link to them? | editorial | EO18 [@@ done] | Accepted Proposal | ||
Levels of Conformance | EO19: I don't understand one of the "Factors that were considered in the process of determining the level to a success criterion", fourth bullet: "implementation difficulty – ranging from deterministic to inferential" |
editorial | EO19 [@@ done] | Accepted Proposal | ||
Levels of Conformance | EO20: plainer terms would make the meaning clearer and easier to translate. | editorial | EO20 [@@ done] | Accepted Proposal | ||
Definition of User Agent (Implementing) |
AR2: There should also be a distinction between s/w developed by a vendor vs s/w developed in-house using a platform purchased from a vendor. |
substantive | AR2: [@@done]UAAG20 can certainly be applied to software developed in-house, and the working group recommends that companies adopt UAAAG20 as an internal policy. However, UAAG20 is a set of guidelines rather than a regulatory document, and whether a company is obligated to follow them will depend upon their regulatory environment, internal purchasing policies, etc. | Proposal not accepted | ||
Definition of a User Agent | EO21:This appears to be identical to the "Definition of a User Agent" in the Implementing document. Could it be tersified in one or the other? | editorial | EO21: [@@ done] - coding error - only in one document | Accepted Proposal | ||
What Qualifies | EO22: I had trouble with the What Qualifies section. The word order tends to make it more confusing than it needs to be. I understand that we need to include procedural as well as declarative languages, but is there any other kind of programming language. Are you making your point? Are you trying to say no programming language is excluded as a basis for generating user interface? What qualifies as a User Agent?These guidelines employ the following tests to determine if software qualifies as a user agent. UAAG 2.0 divides potential user agents into
If the following three conditions are met, then a platform-based application is a user agent:
Example Qual-1: A standard browser. If the following two conditions are met then an extension or plug-in is a user agent:
Example Qual-2: Any media player or browser enhancing extension.
Example Qual-3: Don't have one. I think the confusion in this section springs from lack of examples, and this also springs from the lack of example of a web-app UA in implementing. The distinction between a general web app and a web app UA is not defined clearly, and maybe the concept is not well defined. That is, perhaps a web-app behaves like a UA sometimes and not at others |
editorial | EO22: [@@ done] We deleted the section because it was not consistent with the normative definition, and reworked the definition to incorporate parts of the What Qualifies section. | Alternate Action | ||
What Qualifies | EO26: (Implementing) Third paragraph: the link to "What Qualifies as a User Agent" is followed by the name of the current document in brackets, isn't this redundant? | editorial | [@@ done] See EO22 | Alternative Action | ||
What Qualifies | EO27: I think comment from "Modality Independence Principle" is appropriate here. I like that they use easy-to-follow if-then conditions, but examples are needed for clarity. | editorial | [@@ done] See EO22 | Alternative Action | ||
Modality Independence |
EO22.1: I thought I was going crazy until I noticed that the anchor in the TOC reads "Modality Independence Principle," while the section it links to is titled "Modality Independent Controls" These are very different things. I personally think this section is ok, just need to change the anchor link to "Modality Independent Controls." |
editorial | EO22.1: [@@ done] Action-860 | Proposal Accepted | ||
Relationship with WCAG 2.0 |
EO23.1: The relationship between UAAG and WCAG is not very clear: when the application is considered to be a user agent and when not. As WCAG applies in both cases, why is it mentionned here? |
question | EO23.1: [@@ done] Added reference to normative defintion of user agent. | Proposal Accepted | ||
PRINCIPLE 1 - Ensure that the user interface and rendered content are perceivable | ||||||
Guideline 1.1 - Provide access to alternative content. | ||||||
Summary: The user can choose to render any type of alternative content available. (1.1.1). The user can also choose at least one alternative such as alt text to be always displayed (1.1.3), but it's recommended that users also be able to specify a cascade (1.1.5), such as alt text if it's there, otherwise longdesc, otherwise filename, etc. It's recommended that the user can configure the caption text and that text or sign language alternative cannot obscure the video or the controls (1.1.4). The user can configure the size and position of media alternatives (1.1.6). | |
A | 1.1.1 Render Alternative Content: For any content element, the user can choose to render any types of recognized alternative content that are present. (Level A) | OCAD1: Is the phrase "For any content element " necessary? ...BTW: did the group ever look at this proposal (of mine)?: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-ua/2011AprJun/0086.html |
substantive | OCAD1 - [@@ done] reworded "The user can choose to render any type of recognized alternative content that are present for a content element." |
Accept Proposal | |
A | 1.1.1 Render Alternative Content | JF2: is there something that speaks to this use-case: <abbr title="World Wide Consortium">W3C</abbr>?) | substantive | JF2 - [done] we added an example in the Implementation guide for <abbr> | Accept Proposal | |
Note: It is recommended that the user agent allow the user to choose whether the alternative content replaces or supplements the original content element. | ||||||
A | 1.1.2 Replace Non-Text Content: The user can have all recognized non-text content replaced by alternative content, placeholders, or both. (Level A) | EO29: (Implementing) Several occurences in this guideline and may be elsewhere through the doc: in Intent of success criterion X, the document says that non text content is unusable, or "painful". I have never seen this term elsewhere in W3C docs and wonder if it is appropriate. |
editorial | EO29: [@@ done] |
Accept Proposal |
A | 1.1.2 Replace Non-Text Content | OCAD2 Seems kind of extreme at Level A that the user should have the option to view captions with the video not displayed at all. | substantive | OCAD2: [@@ done] reworded The note addresses that they can supplement. That covers captions. | Accept Proposal | |
Note: At level A, the user agent can specify that an alternative content or placeholder replace the non-text content. At level AA success criterion 1.1.3 requires that the user can specify one format or placeholder to be used. At level AAA success criterion 1.1.5 requires that the user can specify a cascade order of types of alternative content to be used. | ||||||
AA | 1.1.3 Configurable Alternative Content Defaults: For each type of non-text content, the user can specify a type of alternative content that, if present, will be rendered by default. (Level AA) | EO13: (implementing) "Sally is blind. In the browser's preferences dialog box, Sally specifies that she wants alt text displayed in place of images, and that the document should reflow to allow the entire alt text to be displayed rather than truncated." As screen readers retrieve the alt text content is it necessary for a blind user to request that the browser displays alt text rather than images? May be the example should be rewritten to reflect real use of alt text by blind users? |
editorial | EO13: [@@ done][UAWG decided to change to low vision |
Accept Proposal | |
AA | 1.1.4 Display of Alternative Content for Time-Based Media: For recognized on-screen alternative content for time-based media (e.g. captions, sign language video), the following are all true: (Level AA) (a) Don't obscure primary media: The user can specify that displaying time-based media alternatives doesn't obscure the primary time-based media; and (b) Don't obscure controls: The user can specify that the displaying time-based media alternatives doesn't obscure recognized controls for the primary time-based media; and (c) Use configurable text: The user can configure recognized text within time-based media alternatives (e.g. captions) in conformance with 1.4.1. | OCAD3 (a) seems like a lot at AA, especially since captions typically overlay the lower portion of the video. Others make sense. | substantive | OCAD3: [@@ done] reword |
Accept Proposal | |
Note: Depending on the screen area available, the display of the primary time-based media may need to be reduced in size to meet this requirement. | ||||||
AAA | 1.1.5 Default Rendering of Alternative Content (Enhanced): For each type of non-text content, the user can specify the cascade order in which to render different types of alternative content when preferred types are not present. (Level AAA) | OCAD4 Specifying the cascade would seem to lead to a confusing UI. Better to have a quick way to view all the options if the preferred one isn't available. | substantive | OCAD4: [@@ done] deleted | Alternative Action | |
AAA | 1.1.6 Size and Position of Time-Based Media Alternatives: The user can configure recognized alternative content for time-based media (e.g. captions, sign language video) as follows: (Level AAA) (a) The user can resize alternative content for time-based media up to the size of the user agent's viewport. (b) The user can reposition alternative content for time-based media to at least above, below, to the right, to the left, and overlapping the primary time-based media. | EO29.1: (Implementing) In Examples of Success Criterion 1.1.6, the disability of the users is not always specified, (e.g. Maximilian or Tom |
editorial | EO29.1[@@ done] |
Accepted proposal | |
AAA | 1.1.6 Size and Position of Time-Based Media Alternatives | OCAD5 This is a lot of configurability. | OCAD5: [@@ done] reworded |
Alternative Action | ||
AAA | 1.1.6 Size and Position of Time-Based Media Alternatives | OCAD6: Right-and-left is a challenge with horizontally flowing languages like English. | OCAD6: [@@ done] reworded | Alternative Action | ||
Note 1: Depending on the screen area available, the display of the primary time-based media may need to be reduced in size or hidden to meet this requirement. | ||||||
Note 2: Implementation may involve displaying alternative content for time-based media in a separate viewport, but this is not required. | ||||||
Guideline 1.2 - Repair missing content. | ||||||
Summary: The user can request useful alternative content when the author fails to provide it. For example, showing metadata in place of missing or empty (1.2.1) alt text. The user can ask the browser to predict missing structural information, such as field labels, table headings or section headings (1.2.2). | EO28: (implementing) Link to definition of metadata would be helpful |
editorial | EO28: [@@ done] UAWG think it is a common term that has no special UAAG meaning |
Proposal not accepted | ||
AA | 1.2.1 Support Repair by Assistive Technologies: If text alternatives for non-text content are missing or empty then both of the following are true: (Level AA) (a) the user agent does not attempt to repair the text alternatives with text values that are also available to assistive technologies. (b) the user agent makes metadata related to the non-text content available programmatically (and not via fields reserved for text alternatives). | OCAD7: ATAG SC on which this was once based is now more clear (B.2.3.2)...rules out "No Generic or Irrelevant Strings: Generic strings (e.g. "image") and irrelevant strings (e.g., the file name, file format) are not used as text alternatives" |
substantive | OCAD7 [@@ donel] Action-875 on Jan and Greg |
AA | 1.2.1 Support Repair by Assistive Technologies: | EO30: Implementing) Why is a link to "Website Accessibility Conformance Evaluation Methodology" a resource for this particular guideline. I followed the link which brought me to the very top of the Evaluation Methodology Document but I had no idea what I should be looking for or which section to look at. (WCAG-EM) 1.0 | editorial | EO30 [@@ done] | Accept Proposal | |
AA | 1.2.1 Support Repair by Assistive Technologies: | EO31: (Implementing) I think an example of what's stated not to do in a & b would be helpful. Otherwise, I'm not exactly sure what those instructions are warning against. | substantive | EO31 [done] UAWG decided to reword the examples | Accept Proposal | |
AAA | 1.2.2 Repair Missing Structure: The user can specify whether or not the user agent should attempt to insert the following types of structural markup on the basis of author-specified presentation attributes (e.g.. position and appearance): (Level AAA) (a) Labels (b) Headers (e.g. heading markup, table headers) | EO32: (Implementing) Examples of Success Criterion 1.2.2, first example: The example talks about Franck who is called George in the next sentence. ^Try to check that the names remain the same in each example, in order to avoid confusing the reader. |
editorial | EO32 [@@ done] | Accept Proposal | |
Guideline 1.3 - Provide highlighting for selection, keyboard focus, enabled elements, visited links. | ||||||
Summary: The user can visually distinguish selected, focused, and enabled items, and recently visited links (1.3.1), with a choice of highlighting options that at least include foreground and background colors, and border color and thickness (1.3.2). | ||||||
A | 1.3.1 Highlighted Items: The user can specify that the following classes be highlighted so that each is uniquely distinguished: (Level A) (a) selection (b) active keyboard focus (indicated by focus cursors and/or text cursors) (c) recognized enabled input elements (distinguished from disabled elements) (d) elements with alternative content (e) recently visited links | EO34: (Implementing) It would be nice to know that more info is available in "Examples of Success Criterion 1.3.1:" for note items 1 & 2. I don't know if there's a way to indicate this without cluttering up the screen. |
editorial | EO34 [@@done] UAWG decided that there is not a need to do this. The notes and examples are co-located. The visual clutter would reduce accessibility of the doc. |
Proposal not accepted |
A | 1.3.1 Highlighted Items | EO 35: (Implementing) missing word: In second bullet item under "Examples of Success Criterion 1.3.1": "so he tell where" should be "so he can tell where" | editorial | EO35 [@@ done] | Accept proposal | |
A | 1.3.1 Highlighted Items | EO36: (Implementing) 1st example under "Examples of Success Criterion 1.3.1:". When you refer to "website that uses styles to override visited link color", do you mean font style - such as italic in lieu of a "visited link color." If so, I think you should refer to it specifically as "font style" because style in a css file can include color. In any case, the current sentence is too ambiguous. | editorial | EO36 [@@ done] | Accept proposal | |
A | 1.3.1 Highlighted Items | EO37: (Implementing) missing word: Second sentence: "they working" should be "they are working" | editorial | EO37 [@@ done] | Accept proposal | |
A | 1.3.1 Highlighted Items | EO38 (Implementing) Should "hover" be included in the list of 1.3.1 classes where highlighting is user controlled? Or would this be the same as "selection"? | substantive | EO38 [@@done] |
Proposal not accepted | |
A | 1.3.1 Highlighted Items | EO29.2: (Implementing) SC 1.3.1 has three notes. I wonder if it is worth numbering them in note 1, note 2 ... or may be it does not make sense? | editorial | EO29.2 [@@ done] | Accept proposal | |
AA | 1.3.2 Highlighting Options: When highlighting classes specified by 1.3.1 Highlighted Items, the user can specify highlighting options that include at least: (Level AA) (a) foreground colors, (b) background colors, and (c) borders (configurable color, style, and thickness) | EO33: (Implementing) more white space is needed above Section 1.3.2 and now that I'm looking at this more closely, greater line space is needed throughout between paragraphs and bullet items and above subheadings. |
editorial |
EO33: [@@ done] |
Accept proposal | |
AA | 1.3.2 Highlighting Options | OCAD8: This seems like too much configurability, especially if the user agent developer has chosen highlighting styling to maximize visibility within the widest variety of content situations. Fluid UIOptions for example enlarges input fields and makes images underlined and bold. | substantive | OCAD8 [@@done] UAWG decided even though many UA developers may think they have chosen a good default highlighting option, there will be users who will require further customization. | Proposal not accepted | |
Guideline 1.4 - Provide text configuration. | ||||||
Summary: The user can control text font, color, and size (1.4.1), including whether all text should be the shown the same size (1.4.2). | EO39: Typo: not sure whether we should indicate them in EOWG comments: Summary contains one word "the" that should not be there: "The user can control text font, color, and size (1.4.1), including whether all text should be the shown the same size (1.4.2)." |
editorial | [@@done] | Accept proposal | ||
A | 1.4.1 Configure Rendered Text: The user can globally set any or all of the following characteristics of visually rendered text content, overriding any specified by the author or user agent defaults: (Level A) (a) text scale (the general size of text) (b) font family (c) text color (foreground and background) (d) line spacing (e) character spacing | |||||
A | 1.4.2 Preserving Size Distinctions: The user can specify whether or not distinctions in the size of rendered text are preserved when that text is rescaled (e.g. headers continue to be larger than body text). (Level A) | |||||
Guideline 1.5 - Provide volume configuration. | ||||||
Summary: The user can adjust the volume of each audio track relative to the global volume level (1.5.1). | ||||||
A | 1.5.1 Global Volume: The user can independently adjust the volume of all audio tracks, relative to the global volume level set through operating environment mechanisms. (Level A) | OCAD51: Seems like a lot for A. Maybe AA. | substantive | OCAD51: [@@ done] [survey] set to AA | Accept proposal | |
Guideline 1.6 - Provide synthesized speech configuration. | AS1 there should be a section in 1.6 covering the ability to quickly and easily switch speech synthesis language. (http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-uaag2-comments/2013Jun/0000.html for proposal) | substantive | [@@ done] Group agreed to add 1.6.5 | Accept proposal | ||
Summary: If synthesized speech is produced, the user can specify speech rate and volume (1.6.1), pitch and pitch range (1.6.2), and synthesizer speech characteristics like emphasis (1.6.3) and features like spelling (1.6.4). | EO40: grammar/style: "and synthesizer speech characteristics like emphasis (1.6.3) and features like spelling (1.6.4)." "like" should be replaced with "such as" if meaning here includes features such as "emphasis" and "spelling". If the features are similar to "emphasis" and "spelling" but different, then "like" would be used | editorial | [@@ done] | Accept proposal | ||
A | 1.6.1 Speech Rate, Volume, and Voice: If synthesized speech is produced, the user can specify the following: (Level A) (a) speech rate, (b) speech volume (independently of other sources of audio), and (c) voice, when more than one voice option is available | |||||
AA | 1.6.2 Speech Pitch and Range: If synthesized speech is produced, the user can specify the following if offered by the speech synthesizer: (Level AA) (a) pitch (average frequency of the speaking voice), and (b) pitch range (variation in average frequency) | |||||
Note: Because the technical implementations of text to speech engines vary (e.g., formant-based synthesis or concatenative synthesis), a specific engine may not support varying pitch or pitch range. A user agent will expose the availability of pitch and pitch range control if the currently selected or installed text to speech engine offers this capability. | ||||||
AAA | 1.6.3 Advanced Speech Characteristics: The user can adjust all of the speech characteristics offered by the speech synthesizer. (Level AAA) | |||||
AA | 1.6.4 Synthesized Speech Features: If synthesized speech is produced, the following features are provided: (Level AA) (a) user-defined extensions to the synthesized speech dictionary, (b) "spell-out", where text is spelled one character at a time, or according to language-dependent pronunciation rules, (c) at least two ways of speaking numerals: spoken as individual digits and punctuation (e.g. "one two zero three point five" for 1203.5 or "one comma two zero three point five" for 1,203.5), and spoken as full numbers are spoken (e.g. "one thousand, two hundred and three point five" for 1203.5), (d) at least two ways of speaking punctuation: spoken literally, and with punctuation understood from natural pauses. | |||||
Guideline 1.7 - Enable Configuration of User Stylesheets. | ||||||
Summary: The user agent shall support user stylesheets (1.7.1) and the user can choose which if any user-supplied (1.7.2) and author-supplied (1.7.3) stylesheets to use. The user agent will allow users to save user stylesheets (1.7.4). | EO41: (Implementing) 3rd bullet under "Examples of Success Criterion". 2nd occurrence of word "text" should be removed. |
editorial | [@@done]
Accept proposal | ||
Summary 1.7 | EO42: (Implementing) similar problem with 4th bullet under "Examples of Success Criterion". "text easiest to read text if text is highlighted" should be changed to: "text easiest to read if it is highlighted" | editorial | [@@done] | Accept proposal | ||
A | 1.7.1 Support User Stylesheets: If the user agent supports a mechanism for authors to supply stylesheets, the user agent also provides a mechanism for users to supply stylesheets. (Level A) | EO43: (Implementing) I wonder if it would be useful to explain acronyms such as in last "Examples of Success Criterion 1.7.1, 1.7.2 & 1.7.3". explain what is ADHD? Is it clear to any reader? |
editorial | [@@done] | Accept proposal | |
A | 1.7.2 Apply User Stylesheets: If user style sheets are supported, then the user can enable or disable user stylesheets for: (Level A) (a) all pages on specified websites, or (b) all pages | |||||
A | 1.7.3 Author Style Sheets: If the user agent supports a mechanism for authors to supply stylesheets, the user can disable the use of author style sheets on the current page. (Level A) | |||||
AA | 1.7.4 Save Copies of Stylesheets: The user can save copies of the stylesheets referenced by the current page, in order to edit and load the copies as user stylesheets. (Level AA) | |||||
Guideline 1.8 - Help users to use and orient within windows and viewports. | EO45: The meaning of this heading in not clear. Does "use" refer to "windows & viewport" as in "help users to use windows and viewports"? Suggest something like "Help users to orient within, and control, windows and viewports" | editorial | [@@ done] part of the Stem rewrite | Accept Proposal | ||
Summary: The user agent provides programmatic and visual cues to keep the user oriented. These include highlighting the viewport (1.8.1), keeping the focus within the viewport (1.8.2 & 1.8.7), resizing the viewport (1.8.3), providing scrollbar(s) that identify when content is outside the visible region (1.8.4) and which portion is visible (1.8.5), changing the size of graphical content with zoom (1.8.6 & 1.8.12), restoring the focus and point of regard when the user returns to a previously viewed page (1.8.8). Users can set a preference whether new windows or tabs open automatically (1.8.9) or get focus automatically (1.8.10). Additionally, the user can specify that all view ports have the same user interface elements (1.8.11), if and how new viewports open (1.8.9), and whether the new window automatically gets focus (1.8.10). The user can mark items in a webpage and use shortcuts to navigate back to marked items. (1.8.13). | EO44: Summary is long on this item. Readability would be improved if it was broken up into bullet items. |
editorial | EO44: Editors did not want to change the style of Summaries for this one summary. [@@ done] | Proposal not accepted | ||
A | 1.8.1 Highlight Viewport: The viewport with the input focus is highlighted and the user can customize attributes of the highlighting mechanism (e.g. shape, size, stroke width, color, blink rate). The viewport can include nested viewports and containers. (Level A) | OCAD9: Maybe highlighting customization part should be AA? | substantive | OCAD9:[@@ done][survey] UAWG decided to remove highlighting from 1.8.1 and add a new SC with highlighting at AA. | Accept proposal | |
A | 1.8.2 Move Viewport to Selection and Focus: When a viewport's selection or input focus changes, the viewport's content moves as necessary to ensure that the new selection or input focus location is at least partially in the visible portion of the viewport. (Level A) | |||||
A | 1.8.3 Resize Viewport: The user can resize graphical viewports within the limits of the display, overriding any values specified by the author. (Level A) | OCAD10: Maybe AA? I'm concerned this might be read that each viewport needs to be configurable separately? Should it say top-level viewport? | substantive | OCAD10: [@@ done] [survey] Action-862 | OCAD10: proposal accepted | |
A | 1.8.4 Viewport Scrollbars: When the rendered content extends beyond the viewport dimensions, users can have graphical viewports include scrollbars, overriding any values specified by the author. (Level A) | |||||
A | 1.8.5 Indicate Viewport Position: The user can determine the viewport's position relative to the full extent of the rendered content. (Level A) | AS2 (Implementing) 1.8.5 and 1.8.6 have the same $$Ally text and they should be slightly different | editorial | [@@ done] deleted the duplicate. | Alternative Action | |
A | 1.8.6: Zoom: The user can rescale content within graphical viewports as follows: (Level A) (a) Zoom in: to at least 500% of the default size; and (b) Zoom out: to at least 10% of the default size, so the content fits within the height or width of the viewport. | OCAD11: I'm concerned this might be read that each viewport needs to be configurable separately? Should it say top-level viewport? | substantive | OCAD11: [@@ done][survey] reword finalized rewording for top-level viewport |
Accept proposal | |
A | 1.8.7 Maintain point of regard: To the extent possible, the point of regard remains visible and at the same location within the viewport when the viewport is resized, when content is zoomed or scaled, or when content formatting is changed. (Level A) | |||||
AA | 1.8.8 Viewport History: For user agents that implement a viewport history mechanism (e.g. "back" button), the user can return to any state in the viewport history that is allowed by the content, including a restored point of regard, input focus and selection. (Level AA) | EO46: In "Examples of Success Criteria 1.8.8, 1.8.9 & 1.8.10:", first example talking about Justin, there is a word repetition: "The word remains selected remains the same so he doesn't have to reorient or find it on the page." |
editorial | EO46 [@@ done] fixed word repetition. George and Jorge are different people. |
Partial accept | |
AA | 1.8.8 Viewport History | OCAD12: I'm concerned this might be read that each viewport needs to be configurable separately? Should it say top-level viewport? Wording if we should group together top-level viewport SCs for clarity. | substantive | OCAD12 [@@done] [proposal] | Accept proposal | |
AA | 1.8.9 Open on Request: The user can specify whether author content can open new top-level viewports (e.g. windows or tabs). (Level AA) | |||||
AA | 1.8.10 Do Not Take Focus: If new top-level viewports (e.g. windows or tabs) are configured to open without explicit user request, the user can specify whether or not top-level viewports take the active keyboard focus when they open. (Level AA) | |||||
AA | 1.8.11 Same UI: The user can specify that all top-level viewports (e.g. windows or tabs) follow the defined user interface configuration. (Level AA) | |||||
AA | 1.8.12 Reflowing Zoom: The user can request that when reflowable content in a graphical viewport is rescaled, it is reflowed so that one dimension of the content fits within the height or width of the viewport. (Level AA) | OCAD13: usual wording is specify rather than "request". BTW all of the "specifies" make it sound like a lot of settings are required....could some be rewritten in the form: "When reflowable content in a graphical viewport is rescaled, it can be reflowed so that one dimension of the content fits within the height or width of the viewport." | substantive | OCAD13: [@@ done] [survey] Action-863 | Accept proposal | |
Note: User agents are encouraged to allow users to override author instructions not to wrap content (e.g., nowrap). | ||||||
AAA | 1.8.13 Webpage Bookmarks: The user can mark items in a webpage, then use shortcuts to navigate back to marked items. The user can specify whether a navigation mark disappears after a session, or is persistent across sessions. (Level AAA) | |||||
Guideline 1.9 - Provide alternative views. | ||||||
Summary: The user can view the source of content (1.9.2), or an outline view of important elements. (1.9.1). | EO47: For 1.9 should "or" in header ("The user can view the source of content (1.9.2), or an outline view of important elements. (1.9.1).") be "and/or" or simply "and"? Current wording seems to imply you should only do one or the other. | editorial | EO47 [@@ done] | Accept proposal | ||
AA | 1.9.1 Outline View: Users can view a navigable outline of rendered content composed of labels for important elements, and can move focus efficiently to these elements in the main viewport. (Level AA) | |||||
Note: The important elements depend on the web content technology, but may include headings, table captions, and content sections. | ||||||
AAA | 1.9.2 Source View: The user can view all source text that is available to the user agent. (Level AAA) | EO48: (Implementing) The examples of Success Criterion 1.9.2 talk about users who display the source code of a page to find out what an untagged image is for or to modify style sheets. I am not sure that these examples are realistic as users need to have knowledge of code to have a look at lines of source codes. Either the group should explain that these users have already good knowledge of page coding, or the examples should be rewritten. @@Eowg thoughts on this are welcome. See for example the users' reactions in Jaws 14 who can set their screen reader to start reading on a specific place (h, div, and so on) on the page or ignore iframes (like facebook iframes). They are disturbed by the use of code to set this. |
editorial | EO48 [@@done] Editors added that George is a web developer and uses source view as a last resort. | Partial accepted | |
Guideline 1.10 - Provide element information. | ||||||
Summary:The user agent presents information about content relationships (e.g. form labels, table headers)(1.10.1), and extended link information (e.g. title, internal vs. external) (1.10.2) | EO50: I know what you're saying in the summary but I wonder if there's a better phrase than "content relationship" - perhaps "content hierarchy" or "content metadata" or "parent/sibling relationships." | editorial | [@@ done] Editors changed to "relationships between elements" | |||
AA | 1.10.1 Access Relationships: The user can access explicitly-defined relationships based on the user's position in content (e.g. show the label of a form control, show the headers of a table cell). (Level AA) | EO49 (Implementing) Same comment as EO48 for example of success criterion 1.10.2, where the user "selects the text he's interested in, opens the browser's debug window, which shows him that the selected text is an element with class "story" inside a paragraph inside a DIV with class "Premiere". He then knows the combination of classes and element types to specify in the user style sheet.". | editorial | [@@done Editors added that Jack frequently uses user stylesheets. | ||
AAA | 1.10.2 Access to Element Hierarchy: The user can determine the path of element nodes going from the root element of the element hierarchy to the currently focused or selected element. (Level AAA) | OCAD14: This one say "can determine". Same as "can access"? | editorial | [@@done] Editors changed the handle to "Show". Access implies more interactivity that determining. | Alternative action taken | |
PRINCIPLE 2. Ensure that the user interface is operable | ||||||
Guideline 2.1 - Ensure full keyboard access. | ||||||
Summary: Users can operate all functions (2.1.1), and move focus (2.1.2) using just the keyboard. Users can activate important or common features with shortcut keys, (2.1.6), override keyboard shortcuts in content and user interface (2.1.4), escape keyboard traps (2.1.3), specify that selecting an item in a dropdown list or menu not activate that item or move to that new web page (2.1.4) and use standard keys for that platform (2.1.5). | ||||||
A | 2.1.1 Keyboard Operation: All functionality can be operated via the keyboard using sequential or direct keyboard commands that do not require specific timings for individual keystrokes, except where the underlying function requires input that depends on the path of the user's movement and not just the endpoints (e.g. free hand drawing). This does not forbid and should not discourage providing other input methods in addition to keyboard operation including mouse, touch, gesture and speech. (Level A) | |||||
A | : Every viewport has an active or inactive keyboard focus at all times. (Level A) | EO51 (Implementing) example 1: Two names have been used for first example: Amal and Alan. |
editorial | [@@t done] Editors fixed |
Accepted | |
A | 2.1.2 Keyboard Focus | OCAD15: Is this still needed with 1.8.1 and 1.8.8? | substantive | OCAD 15: [@@ done] [proposal] UAWG decided not to accept because 2.1.2 requires a keyboard focus to exist, and the others are "if a keyboard focus exists". | Proposal not accepted | |
A | 2.1.3 No Keyboard Trap: If keyboard focus can be moved to a component using a keyboard interface (including nested user agents), then focus can be moved away from that component using only a keyboard interface. If this requires more than unmodified arrow or tab keys (or other standard exit methods), users are advised of the method for moving focus away. (Level A) | |||||
A | 2.1.4 Separate Selection from Activation: The user can specify that focus and selection can be moved without causing further changes in focus, selection, or the state of controls, by either the user agent or author content. (Level A) | EO52 (Implementing) last example refers to a specific device and screeen reader (Iphone and Voiceover). Is it ok to do that, or should the document remain device and screen reader neutral? "Ari uses Voiceover on his iPhone to navigate a webpage. He selects an item and is able to activate the element using gestures. This requires sufficient screen real estate to perform gestures without changing focus." |
editorial | EO52: [@@ done] | Accepted proposal | |
2.1.4 Separate Selection from Activation | OCAD16: Does "author content" need a definition? Sometimes also says "author supplied" | question | OCAD16 [@@ done] [proposal] UAWG decided to change it to author-supplied | Accepted proposal | ||
A | 2.1.5 Follow Text Keyboard Conventions: The user agent follows keyboard conventions for the operating environment. (Level A) | |||||
A | 2.1.6 Efficient Keyboard Access: The user agent user interface includes mechanisms to make keyboard access more efficient than sequential keyboard access. (Level A) | |||||
Guideline 2.2 - Provide sequential navigation | ||||||
Summary: Users can use the keyboard to navigate sequentially (2.2.3) to all the operable elements (2.2.1) in the viewport as well as between viewports (2.2.2). Users can optionally disable wrapping or request a signal when wrapping occurs (2.2.4). | ||||||
A | 2.2.1 Sequential Navigation Between Elements: The user can move the keyboard focus backwards and forwards through all recognized enabled elements in the current viewport. (Level A) | |||||
A | 2.2.2 Sequential Navigation Between Viewports: The user can move the keyboard focus backwards and forwards between viewports, without having to sequentially navigate all the elements in a viewport. (Level A) | |||||
A | 2.2.3 Default Navigation Order: If the author has not specified a navigation order, the default sequential navigation order is the document order. (Level A) | |||||
A | 2.2.4 Options for Wrapping in Navigation The user can prevent sequential navigation from wrapping the focus at the beginning or end of a document, and can request notification when such wrapping occurs. (Level AA) | OCAD17: Should this be AA? Missing ":". Also, wording feels odd (allow it to be turned off, alert when it is done). | [editorial] [@@ done] [survey] A-> AA [@@ done] |
stay at AA, reword |
Guideline 2.3 - Provide direct navigation and activation | ||||||
Summary: Users can navigate directly (e.g. keyboard shortcuts) to important elements (2.3.1) with the option of immediate activation of the operable elements (2.3.3). Display commands with the elements to make it easier for users to discover the commands (2.3.2 & 2.3.4). The user can remap and save direct commands (2.3.5). | ||||||
AA | 2.3.1 Direct Navigation to Important Elements: The user can navigate directly to any important elements (e.g. structural or operable) in rendered content. (Level AA) | OCAD18: Maybe remove "any" and the e.g....it is really important the reader views the definition. | editorial | [@@done] Editors removed "any" and e.g. | Accepted proposal | |
AA | 2.3.2 Present Direct Commands from Rendered Content (enhanced): The user can have any recognized direct commands in rendered content (e.g. accesskey, landmark) be presented with their associated elements (e.g. Alt+R to reply to a web email). (Level AA) | OCAD19: Says "Enhanced" but there is no minimum. Prefer to have just one e.g. per sentence rather than two. | editorial | [@@ done] UAWG removed Enhanced. Both examples are needed for clarity. | Partial | |
A | 2.3.3 Direct activation of Enabled Elements: The user can move directly to and activate any enabled element in rendered content. (Level A) | OCAD20: Perhaps AA? | substantive | [survey] proposal not accepted. [@@ done] the UAWG feels this is essential for users relying on speech input, and there are numerous examples available. | Not Accepted | |
AA | 2.3.4 Present Direct Commands in User Interface: The user can have any direct commands in the user agent user interface (e.g. keyboard shortcuts) be presented with their associated user interface controls (e.g. "Ctrl+S" displayed on the "Save" menu item and toolbar button). (Level AA) | OCAD21: Again, prefer just one e.g. | editorial | [@@ done] Both e.g. are needed for clarity. | Not Accepted | |
AA | 2.3.5 Customize Keyboard Commands: The user can override any keyboard shortcut including recognized author supplied shortcuts (e.g. accesskeys) and user agent user interface controls, except for conventional bindings for the operating environment (e.g. arrow keys for navigating within menus). The rebinding options must include single-key and key-plus-modifier keys if available in the operating environment. The user must be able to save these settings beyond the current session. (Level AA) | OCAD22: Save requirement should be removed as it is covered by 2.7.1. Also the single-key and key-plus-modifier text seems like overkill. | substantive | OCAD22 [@@ done][proposal] UAWG decided to remove Save and note it in the IER. | Accepted | |
Guideline 2.4 - Provide text search. | ||||||
Summary: Users can search rendered content (2.4.1) forward or backward (2.4.2) and can have the matched content highlighted in the viewport (2.4.3). The user is notified if there is no match (2.4.4). Users can also search by case and for text within alternative content (2.4.5). | ||||||
A | 2.4.1 Text Search: The user can perform a search within rendered content (e.g. not hidden with a style), including rendered text alternatives and rendered generated content, for any sequence of printing characters from the document character set. (Level A) | EO53 (Implementing) In "Examples of Success Criterion 2.4.1:"
OCAD23: Can e.g. be removed? |
editorial editorial |
[@@ done] corrected [@@ done] Editors agreed that the e.g. added ambiguity. |
Accepted Accepted |
A | 2.4.2 Find Direction: The user can search forward or backward in rendered content. (Level A) | |||||
A | 2.4.3 Match Found: When a search operation produces a match, the matched content is highlighted, the viewport is scrolled if necessary so that the matched content is within its visible area, and the user can search from the location of the match. (Level A) | EO54 (Implementing) In Examples of Success Criterion 2.4.3: "Jules is low vision and uses a magnified screen." Better write: "Jules has low vision and uses a magnified screen." | editorial | [@@ done] fixed | Accepted | |
A | 2.4.4 Alert on Wrap or No Match: The user can be notified when there is no match to a search operation. The user can be notified when the search continues from the beginning or end of content. (Level A) | |||||
AA | 2.4.5 Search alternative content: The user can perform text searches within textual alternative content (e.g. text alternatives for non-text content, captions) even when the textual alternative content is not rendered onscreen. (Level AA) | |||||
Guideline 2.5 - Provide structural navigation. | ||||||
Summary: Users can view (2.5.1), navigate (2.5.2), and configure the elements used in navigating (2.5.3) content hierarchy. | ||||||
AA | 2.5.1 Location in Hierarchy: When the user agent is presenting hierarchical information, but the hierarchy is not reflected in a standardized fashion in the DOM or platform accessibility services, the user can view the path of nodes leading from the root of the hierarchy to a specified element. (Level AA) | OCAD24: How is this related to 1.10.2? | question | OCAD 24 [@@ done] [proposal] The reference to 2.5.2 was deleted | Accepted proposal | Accepted |
AA | 2.5.2 Navigate by structural element: The user agent provides at least the following types of structural navigation, where the structure types exist:(Level AA) (a) by heading (b) within tables | OCAD25: How is this related to 1.10.1? AS3 (Implementing) has "inpu" which should be "input" |
question editorial |
OCAD25 [@@ done][proposal] The reference to 2.5.2 was deleted [editorial] |
Accepted proposal | Accepted |
AAA | 2.5.3 Configure Elements for Structural Navigation: The user can configure sets of important elements (including element types) for structured navigation and hierarchical/outline view. (Level AAA) | OCAD26: "configure sets of" implies ability to create multiple sets | substantive | OCAD 26 [@@ done][proposal] UAWG decided to change to "a set" | Accepted proposal | Accepted |
Guideline 2.6 - Provide access to event handlers | ||||||
Summary:Users can interact with web content by mouse, keyboard, voice input, gesture, or a combination of input methods. Users can discover what event handlers (e.g. onmouseover) are available at the element and activate an element's events individually (2.6.1). | ||||||
AA | 2.6.1 Access to input methods: The user can discover recognized input methods explicitly associated with an element, and activate those methods in a modality independent manner. (Level AA) | OCAD27: User can discover? | substantive | OCAD27 [@@ done][proposal] UAWG decided to reword the SC. | Accepted | |
Guideline 2.7 - Configure and store preference settings | ||||||
Summary: Users can restore preference settings to default (2.7.2), and accessibility settings persist between sessions (2.7.1). Users can manage multiple sets of preference settings (2.7.3), and adjust preference setting outside the user interface so the current user interface does not prevent access (2.7.4). It's also recommended that groups of settings can be transported to compatible systems (2.7.5). | ||||||
A | 2.7.1 Persistent Accessibility Settings: User agent accessibility preference settings persist between sessions. (Level A) | OCAD28: Maybe reword to use the term "saved" | editorial | [@@ done] Saving is in 2.7.3 | Not Accepted | |
A | 2.7.2 Restore all to default: The user can restore all preference settings to default values. (Level A) | |||||
AA | 2.7.3 Multiple Sets of Preference Settings: The user can save and retrieve multiple sets of user agent preference settings. (Level AA) | EO55 (Implementing) In last example of SC 2.7.3: "At those times he users his browser's user preference profiles to load a different configuration that's optimized for the keyboard." Write: "He uses his keyboard" | editorial | [@@ done] | Accepted | |
AA | 2.7.4 Change preference settings outside the user interface: The user can adjust any preference settings required to meet the User Agent Accessibility Guidelines (UAAG) 2.0 from outside the user agent user interface. (Level AA) | OCAD29: AAA perhaps? |
substantive |
[survey] [@@ done] UAWG decision |
Accepted |
AA | 2.7.4 Change preference settings outside the user interface: | EO56 (Implementing)
editorial | EO56 [@@ done] | Accepted | |
AAA | 2.7.5 Portable Preference Settings: The user can transfer all compatible user agent preference settings between computers. (Level AAA) | OCAD30: "computers" sounds outdated. | editorial | [@@ done] "devices" |
Accepted | |
Guideline 2.8 - Customize display of GUI controls | ||||||
Summary: It's recommended that users can add, remove and configure the position of graphical user agent controls and restore them to their default settings (2.8.1). | ||||||
AA | 2.8.1 Customize display of controls representing user interface commands, functions, and extensions: The user can customize which user agent commands, functions, and extensions are displayed within the user agent's user interface as follows:(Level AA) (a) Show: The user can choose to display any controls available within the user agent user interface, including user-installed extensions. It is acceptable to limit the total number of controls that are displayed onscreen. (b) Simplify: The user can simplify the default user interface by choosing to display only commands essential for basic operation (e.g. by hiding some control). (c) Reposition: The user can choose to reposition individual controls within containers (e.g. Toolbars or tool palettes), as well as reposition the containers themselves to facilitate physical access (e.g. To minimize hand travel on touch screens, or to facilitate preferred hand access on handheld mobile devices). (d) Assign Activation Keystrokes or Gestures: The user can choose to view, assign or change default keystrokes or gestures used to activate controls. (e) Reset: The user has the option to reset the containers and controls to their original configuration. | EO57 (Implementing) In Examples for SC 2.8.1:
editoral | EO57 [@@ done] |
Accepted | |
AA | 2.8.1 Customize display of controls representing user interface commands, functions, and extensions: | OCAD31: This SC is probably twice as long as the next biggest. Has a different feel. | substantive | OCAD31 [@@ done] [proposal] UAWG decided that this SC had been many SC. They were combined because they all interrelated and built upon each other. | Proposal not accepted | Accepted |
AA | 2.8.2 Reset Toolbar Configuration: | EO58 there is only one title of 2.8.2 reset Toolbar configuration, and no text in it. |
editorial | EO58 [@@ done] | Accepted | |
AA | 2.8.2 Reset Toolbar Configuration: | OCAD32 this is an orphan handle | editorial | OCAD32 [@@ done] | Accepted | |
Guideline 2.9 - Allow time-independent interaction. |
Summary: Users can extend the time limit for user input when such limits are controllable by the user agent (2.9.1); by default, the user agent shows the progress of content in the process of downloading (2.9.2). | ||||||
A | 2.9.1 Adjustable Timing: Where time limits for user input are recognized and controllable by the user agent, the user can extend the time limits. (Level A) | |||||
A | 2.9.2 Retrieval Progress: By default, the user agent shows the progress of content retrieval. (Level A) | OCAD33: I think this is in the wrong GL, it doesn't allow time-independent interaction | substantive | OCAD33 [proposal] UAWG decided to move it to 3.2.6 Avoid mistakes. Added a new example of an RSI user. Changed progress of content retrieval to content retrieval activity | Accept proposal | Accept |
Guideline 2.10 - Help users avoid flashing that could cause seizures. | ||||||
Summary: To help users avoid seizures, the default configuration prevents the browser user interface and rendered content from flashing more than three times a second above a luminescence or color threshold (2.10.1), or does not flash at all (2.10.2). | ||||||
A | 2.10.1 Three Flashes or Below Threshold: In its default configuration, the user agent does not display any user interface components or recognized content that flashes more than three times in any one-second period, unless the flash is below the general flash and red flash thresholds. (Level A) | OCAD34: This is good for the User Agent UI, but hard to automatically determine in playing content. Perhaps 2.11.1 handles this? | substantive | OCAD34 [@@ done] [proposal] UAWG decided to remove the "or recognized content" | Accepted proposal | |
AAA | 2.10.2 Three Flashes: In its default configuration, the user agent does not display any user interface components or recognized content that flashes more than three times in any one-second period (regardless of whether not the flash is below the general flash and red flash thresholds). (Level AAA) | OCAD35: Could this also then be removed? (related to comment OCAD34) | substantive | OCAD35 [@@ done] [see OCAD34]] [proposal] UAWG decided to remove the "or recognized content" | Accepted proposal | |
Guideline 2.11 - Provide control of content that may reduce accessibility. | ||||||
Summary: The user can present placeholders for time-based media (2.11.1) and executable regions (2.11.2), or block all executable content (2.11.3); adjust playback (2.11.4), stop/pause/resume (2.11.5), navigate, (2.11.6) and specify tracks for prerecorded time-based media (2.11.8); and adjust contrast and brightness of visual time-based media (2.11.9). | ||||||
Applicability Notes: Guideline 2.11 and its success criteria only apply to images, animations, video, audio, etc. that the user agent can recognize. | ||||||
A | 2.11.1 Time-Based Media Load-Only: The user can override the play on load of recognized time-based media content such that the content is not played until explicit user request. (Level A) | EO59 (Implementing) In the first examples of Success Criterion 2.11.1: one word repeated: "Jill is blind. She browses browses the web using a screen reader to listen to the text of web pages." |
editorial | EO59 [@@ done] | Accepted | |
A | 2.11.2 Execution Placeholder: The user can render a placeholder instead of executable content that would normally be contained within an on-screen area (e.g. Applet, Flash), until explicit user request to execute. (Level A) | EO 60 (Implementing) In Intent of Success Criterion 2.11.2 : last sentence of the note before examples: placholder instead of placeholder. |
editorial | EO60 [@@ done] |
Accepted | |
A | 2.11.2 Execution Placeholder | EO 61 (Implementing) Examples of SC 2.11.2:
editorial | EO61 [@@ done] removed duplicates, and removed stray word that confused the grammar. | Accepted | |
A | 2.11.3 Execution Toggle: The user can turn on/off the execution of executable content that would not normally be contained within a particular area (e.g. Javascript). (Level A) | |||||
A | 2.11.4 Playback Rate Adjustment for Prerecorded Content: The user can adjust the playback rate of prerecorded time-based media content, such that all of the following are true: (Level A) (a) The user can adjust the playback rate of the time-based media tracks to between 50% and 250% of real time. (b) Speech whose playback rate has been adjusted by the user maintains pitch in order to limit degradation of the speech quality. (c) Audio and video tracks remain synchronized across this required range of playback rates. (d) The user agent provides a function that resets the playback rate to normal (100%). | OCAD36: Could this be AA? | substantive | OCAD36 [@@ done] [survey]Proposal Accepted change to AA | Accepted | |
A | 2.11.5 Stop/Pause/Resume Time-Based Media: The user can stop, pause, and resume rendered audio and animation content (including video, animated images, and changing text) that last three or more seconds at their default playback rate. (Level A) | OCAD37: 3 seconds seems weirdly short | substantive | OCAD37 [@@ done]Taken from WCAG wording. No change. | Not accepted | Accepted |
A | 2.11.6 Navigate Time-Based Media: The user can navigate along the timebase using a continuous scale, and by relative time units within rendered audio and animations (including video and animated images) that last three or more seconds at their default playback rate. (Level A) | OCAD38: 3 seconds seems weirdly short | substantive | [@@ done]Taken from WCAG wording. No change. | Not accepted | Accepted |
AA | 2.11.7 Semantic Navigation of Time-Based Media: The user can navigate by semantic structure within the time-based media, such as by chapters or scenes present in the media. (Level AA) | |||||
AA | 2.11.8 Track Enable/Disable of Time-Based Media: During time-based media playback, the user can determine which tracks are available and select or deselect tracks, overriding global default settings, such as captions or audio descriptions. (Level AA) | OCAD39: Both the examples in the implementing document are taken care of by something in GL1.1? So perhaps this can be removed. | substantive | OCAD39 [@@ done] [proposal] UAWG decided to delete 2.11.8 and move the intent and examples to 1.1.1. New example to add to 1.5.1 | Accepted proposal | |
AAA | 2.11.9 Video Contrast and Brightness: Users can adjust the contrast and brightness of visual time-based media. (Level AAA) | |||||
Guideline 2.12 - Other Input Devices | ||||||
Summary: For all input devices supported by the platform, the user agents should let the user perform all functions aside from entering text (2.12.2), and enter text with any platform-provided features (2.12.1). If possible, it is also encouraged to let the user enter text even if the platform does not provide such a feature (2.12.3). | ||||||
A | 2.12.1 Support Platform Text Input Devices: If the platform supports text input using an input device, the user agent is compatible with this functionality. (Level A) | |||||
AA | 2.12.2 Operation With Any Device: If an input device is supported by the platform, all user agent functionality other than text input can be operated using that device. (Level AA) | |||||
AAA | 2.12.3 Text Input With Any Device: If an input device is supported by the platform, all user agent functionality including text input can be operated using that device. (Level AAA) | |||||
PRINCIPLE 3: Ensure that the user interface is understandable | ||||||
Guideline 3.1 - Help users avoid unnecessary messages. | ||||||
Summary: Users can turn off non-essential messages from the author or user-agent. | ||||||
AA | 3.1.1 Reduce Interruptions: The user can avoid or defer recognized non-essential or low priority messages and updating/changing information in the user agent user interface and rendered content. (Level AA) | OCAD40: Maybe remove "and rendered content". Only mechanism for this in content would seem to be politeness level and implementing that is should following the content spec. | substantive | OCAD40 [@@ done][survey] Alternative action taken | Alternative action taken | Accepted |
Guideline 3.2 - Help users avoid and correct mistakes. | ||||||
Summary: Users can have form submissions require confirmation (3.2.1), go back after navigating (3.2.2), and have their text checked for spelling errors (3.2.3). | ||||||
AA | 3.2.1 Form Submission: The user can specify whether or not recognized form submissions must be confirmed. (Level AA) | |||||
AA | 3.2.2 Back Button: The user can reverse recognized navigation between web addresses (e.g. standard "back button" functionality). (Level AA) | |||||
AA | 3.2.3 Provide spell checking functionality: User agents provide spell checking functionality for text created inside the user agent. (Level AA) | |||||
A | 3.2.4 Text Entry Undo: The user can reverse recognized text entry actions prior to submission. (Level A) | |||||
Note: Submission can be triggered in many different ways, such as clicking a submit button, typing a key in a control with an onkeypress event, or by a script responding to a timer. | ||||||
A | 3.2.5 Settings Change Confirmation: If the user agent provides mechanisms for changing its user interface settings, it either allows the user to reverse the setting changes, or the user can require user confirmation to proceed. (Level A) | |||||
Guideline 3.3 - Document the user agent user interface including accessibility features. | ||||||
Summary: User documentation is available in an accessible format (3.3.1), it includes accessibility features (3.3.2), delineates differences between versions (3.3.3), provides a centralized views of conformance UAAG2.0 (3.3.4), and is available as context sensitive help in the UA (3.3.5). | ||||||
A | 3.3.1 Accessible documentation: The product documentation is available in a format that meets success criteria of WCAG 2.0 Level "A" or greater. (Level A) | OCAD41: "conforms to least WCAG 2.0 Level A. | editorial | OCAD41 [@@done] | Accepted | |
A | 3.3.2 Document Accessibility Features: All features of the user agent that meet User Agent Accessibility Guidelines 2.0 success criteria are documented. (Level A) | OCAD42: The corresponding ATAG2 SC was rewritten: http://www.w3.org/WAI/AU/ATAG20/#sc_a421 | substantive | OCAD42 [@@ not done] | ||
AA | 3.3.3 Changes Between Versions: Changes to features that meet UAAG 2.0 success criteria since the previous user agent release are documented. (Level AA) | |||||
AAA | 3.3.4 Centralized View: There is a dedicated section of the documentation that presents a view of all features of the user agent necessary to meet the requirements of User Agent Accessibility Guidelines 2.0. (Level AAA) | |||||
Guideline 3.4 - The user agent must behave in a predictable fashion. | ||||||
Summary: Users can prevent non-requested focus changes (3.4.1). | ||||||
A | 3.4.1 Avoid unpredictable focus: The user can prevent focus changes that are not a result of explicit user request. (Level A) | OCAD43: This seems like the superset (and so the possible replacement) of 1.8.9 and 2.1.4. | substantive | OCAD43 [@@ done][proposal] UAWG decided 1.8.9 is separate enough. 2.1.4 is separate. They are needed where they are. | Proposal Not Accepted | May bring another proposal |
PRINCIPLE 4: Facilitate programmatic access | ||||||
Guideline 4.1 - Facilitate programmatic access to assistive technology | ||||||
Summary: Be compatible with assistive technologies by supporting platform standards (4.1.1), including providing information about all menus, buttons, dialogs, etc. (4.1.2, 4.1.6), access to DOMs (4.1.4), and access to structural relationships and meanings, such as what text or image labels a control or serves as a heading (4.1.5). Where something can't be made accessible, provide an accessible alternative version, such as a standard window in place of a customized window (4.1.3). Make sure that that programmatic exchanges are quick and responsive (4.1.7). | ||||||
A | 4.1.1 Platform Accessibility Services: The user agent supports relevant platform accessibility services. (Level A) | |||||
A | 4.1.2 Name, Role, State, Value, Description: For all user interface components including user interface, rendered content, generated content, and alternative content, the user agent makes available the name, role, state, value, and description via platform accessibility services. (Level A) | OCAD44: Isn't this implementation detail for 4.1.1? | substantive | OCAD44 [@@ done]
[survey] UAWG decided that leaving them separate success criteria provides more protection for assistive technology |
Proposal Not Accepted | Accepted |
A | 4.1.3 Accessible Alternative: If a component of the user agent user interface cannot be exposed through platform accessibility services, then the user agent provides an equivalent alternative that is exposed through the platform accessibility service. (Level A) | |||||
A | 4.1.4 Programmatic Availability of DOMs: If the user agent implements one or more DOMs, they must be made programmatically available to assistive technologies. (Level A) | |||||
A | 4.1.5 Write Access: If the user can modify the state or value of a piece of content through the user interface (e.g., by checking a box or editing a text area), the same degree of write access is available programmatically. (Level A) | OCAD45: Still isn't possible for ARIA as far as I know. | substantive | OCAD45 [@@ done] [proposal] UAWG decided that the general requirement is still true. Scripts must be properly notified by the browser when states change. | Proposal not accepted | Accepted |
A | 4.1.6 Expose Accessible Properties: If any of the following properties are supported by the platform accessibility services, make the properties available to the accessibility platform architecture: (Level A) (a) the bounding dimensions and coordinates of onscreen elements (b) font family of text (c) font size of text (d) foreground color of text (e) background color of text. (f) change state/value notifications (g) selection (h) highlighting (i) input device focus (j) direct keyboard commands (k) underline of menu items (keyboard command/shortcuts) | OCAD46: Why is this split from 4.1.2? | question | OCAD46 [@@ done][ proposal] |
Alternative Action | Accepted |
A | 4.1.7 Timely Communication: For APIs implemented to satisfy the requirements of UAAG 2.0, ensure that programmatic exchanges proceed at a rate such that users do not perceive a delay. (Level A) | |||||
PRINCIPLE 5: Comply with applicable specifications and conventions | ||||||
Guideline 5.1 - Comply with applicable specifications and conventions. | ||||||
Summary: When the browser's menus, buttons, dialogs, etc. are authored in HTML or similar standards, they need to meet W3C's Web Content Accessibility Guidelines. | ||||||
AAA | 5.1.1 WCAG Compliant: Web-based user agent user interfaces meet the WCAG 2.0 success criteria: Level A to meet WCAG 2.0 Level A success criteria; Level AA to meet WCAG 2.0 Level A and AA success criteria; Level AAA to meet all WCAG 2.0 success criteria. (Level AAA) | OCAD47: Might want to remove Level AAA since it will be hard to find implementations. | substantive | OCAD51 [@@ done][survey] Proposal not accepted because the group felt it was too early to remove SC for lack of implementations. | Proposal not accepted | |
Note: This success criterion does not apply to non-Web-based user agent user interfaces, but does include any parts of non-Web-based user agents that are Web-based (e.g. help systems). | ||||||
A | 5.1.2 Implement accessibility features of content specs: Implement and cite in the conformance claim the accessibility features of content specifications. Accessibility features are those that are either (Level A): (a) Identified as such in the specification or (b) Allow authors to satisfy a requirement of WCAG | OCAD48: This is central to the whole thing and it seems buried here. | substantive | OCAD48 [@@ done]The group discussed renumbering or adding to the intro to make it more promintent, but it conflicted with other priorities (parallel to WCAG). | Proposal Not accepted | Accepted |
A | 5.1.3 Implement Accessibility Features of platform: If the user agent contains non-web-based user interfaces, then those user interfaces follow user interface accessibility guidelines for the platform. (Level A) | |||||
A | 5.1.4 Handle Unrendered Technologies: If the user agent does not render a technology, the user can choose a way to handle content in that technology (e.g. by launching another application or by saving it to disk). (Level A) | OCAD49: Is this an accessibility issue? | question | OCAD49 [@@ done] [survey] proposal accepted. SC removed | Accepted | |
AA | 5.1.5 Alternative content handlers: The user can select content elements and have them rendered in alternative viewers. (Level AA) | OCAD50: Why is this AA if this user agent does a good job of making them accessible? | question | OCAD50 [@@ done] [followup] explain no change | Not accepted | |
AAA | 5.1.6 Enable Reporting of User Agent Accessibility Faults: The user agent provides a mechanism for users to report user agent accessibility issues. (Level AAA) | |||||
Applicability Note: When a rendering requirement of another specification contradicts a requirement of UAAG 2.0, the user agent may disregard the rendering requirement of the other specification and still satisfy this guideline. |


text:
LIVE OAK, FLA., Feb. 01, 2022 – The Suwannee River Water Management District (District) will hold its Governing Board meeting on Tuesday, February 8 at 9 a.m. The meeting will be accessible online and open to the public at the District headquarters.
In addition to in-person participation, the meeting will utilize online technology for visuals and audio. Those wishing to participate virtually should register at https://bit.ly/3rgaH5o. A confirmation email with a link to join the online meeting will be sent after registration. If using a phone for audio, a pin number will be required for audio controls to be enabled. The pin number will be available after logging onto the webinar. For detailed instructions on how to join the webinar, please visit www.MySuwanneeRiver.com/Calendar.
Those wishing to provide public comment on an item should submit their comment online at www.MySuwanneeRiver.com/Comments.
The February 8 Governing Board meeting agenda and meeting materials are posted on the District website at www.MySuwanneeRiver.com.
The mission of the Suwannee River Water Management District is to protect and manage water resources using science-based solutions to support natural systems and the needs of the public. The District holds true to the belief of water for nature, water for people. Headquartered in Live Oak, Florida, the District serves 15 surrounding north-central Florida counties.
For more information about the District, visit www.MySuwanneeRiver.com or follow us on Facebook, Twitter and Instagram, search @SRWMD.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Exposing right-wing power grabs, corporate fraud, billionaires' misconduct, and Trump's war on democracy as he attempts to steal the 2020 election. @latestoutrage on Twitter / LatestOutrage Facebook / LatestOutrage.org
Tuesday, June 24, 2008
Remembering The UpStairs Fire, 35 Years Later
| Firebombing of New Orleans gay bar killed 32 on June 24, 1973
Last week, California gave its stamp of approval to same-sex marriage, becoming only the second state after Massachusetts to do so. Gay couples in California lined up to tie the knot, welcomed with open arms by most city halls. Many Americans rejoiced, both gay and straight. Especially happy was the California wedding industry, which stands to gain an estimated additional $684 million over the next three years.
Fear of gay marriage has long been exploited by right-wingers as the ultimate homophobic weapon to scare up bigotry and votes. Predictably, a parade of anti-gay forces came out of the woodwork, howling in protest.
Some rural counties stopped issuing any marriage licenses to avoid implementing the California Supreme Court's ruling. Opponents have placed an initiative on the fall ballot that would once again shut the door on same-sex marriage.
But they're on the wrong side of history. And to fully understand the events of last week, it's important to remember a tragedy that happened thirty-five years ago today, and how much things have changed for gays and lesbians since then.
On the last Sunday in June, 1973, a gay bar in New Orleans called the UpStairs Lounge was firebombed, and the resulting blaze killed 32 people. At the time, the bar had recently served as the temporary home for the fledgling New Orleans congregation of the Metropolitan Community Church. Founded in Los Angeles in 1968, the MCC was the nation's first gay church.
It was the third fire at a MCC church during the first half of 1973, following earlier arsons in Nashville and Los Angeles. The church's Los Angeles headquarters was destroyed on January 27, five days after the U.S. Supreme Court announced its momentous decision in the case of Roe v. Wade.
That Sunday was the final day of Pride Weekend, the fourth anniversary of the Stonewall Uprising of 1969. Yet there was still no Gay Pride Parade in New Orleans. Almost two dozen gay bars dotted the French Quarter, but gay life in the city remained largely underground.
Located on the second floor of a three-story building at the corner of Chartres and Iberville Streets, the UpStairs Lounge had only one entrance, up a wooden flight of stairs. Nearly 125 regulars had jammed the bar earlier that afternoon for a free beer and all you could eat special. After the free beer ran out, about 60 stayed, mostly members of the MCC congregation.
Original site of the UpStairs Lounge at 141 Chartres Street as it looked in Spring, 2008.
Before moving worship services to their pastor's home earlier in June, congregation members had been holding services at the UpStairs on Sundays. But the bar was still a spiritual gathering place. There was a piano in one of the bar's three rooms, and a cabaret stage. Members would pray and sing in this room, and every Sunday night, they gathered around the piano for a song they had adopted as their anthem, United We Stand, by The Brotherhood of Man.
United we stand, divided we fall...
And if our backs should ever be against the wall,
We'll be together…
Together...you and I.
They sang the song that evening, with David Gary on the piano, a professional pianist who played regularly in the lounge of the Marriott Hotel across the street. The congregation members repeated the verses again and again, swaying back and forth, arm in arm, happy to be together at their former place of worship on Pride Sunday, still feeling the effects of the free beer special.
At 7:56 pm a buzzer from downstairs sounded, the one that signaled a cab had arrived. No one had called a cab, but when someone opened the second floor steel door to the stairwell, flames rushed in. An arsonist had deliberately set the wooden stairs ablaze, and the oxygen starved fire exploded. The still-crowded bar became an inferno within seconds.
The emergency exit was not marked, and the windows were boarded up or covered with iron bars. A few survivors managed to make it through, and jumped to the sidewalks, some in flames. Rev. Bill Larson, the local MCC pastor, got stuck halfway and burned to death wedged in a window, his corpse visible throughout the next day to witnesses below.
This photo appeared in wire stories about the tragedy. Rev. Larson's body was not removed from the window throughout the initial investigation, and symbolized the city's uncaring attitude towards the mostly gay victims.
Bartender Buddy Rasmussen led a group of fifteen to safety through the unmarked back door. One of them was MCC assistant pastor George "Mitch" Mitchell. Then Mitch ran back into the burning building trying to save his partner, Louis Broussard. Their bodies were discovered lying together.
View of the building from Iberville Street in the fire's aftermath. Police are visible in the far right window.
29 lives were lost that night, and another three victims later died of injuries from the fire. The death toll was the worst in New Orleans history up to that time, including when the French Quarter burned to the ground in 1788. It was almost assuredly the largest mass murder of gays and lesbians to ever occur in the United States.
Yet the city of New Orleans tried mightily to ignore it. Public reaction was grossly out of proportion to what would have happened if the victims were straight. The fire exposed an ugly streak of homophobia and bigotry. It was the first time New Orleans had to openly confront the existence of its own gay community, and the results were not pretty.
Initial news coverage omitted mention that the fire had anything to do with gays, despite the fact that a gay church in a gay bar had been torched. What stories did appear used dehumanizing language to paint the scene, with stories in the States-Item, New Orleans' afternoon paper, describing "bodies stacked up like pancakes," and that "in one corner, workers stood knee deep in bodies…the heat had been so intense, many were cooked together." Other reports spoke of "mass charred flesh" and victims who were "literally cooked."
The press ran quotes from one New Orleans cab driver who said, "I hope the fire burned their dress off," and a local woman who claimed "the Lord had something to do with this." The fire disappeared from headlines after the second day.
A joke made the rounds and was repeated by talk radio hosts asking, "What will they bury the ashes of queers in? Fruit jars." Official statements by police were similarly offensive. Major Henry Morris, chief detective of the New Orleans Police Department, dismissed the importance of the investigation in an interview with the States-Item. Asked about identifying the victims, he said, "We don't even know these papers belonged to the people we found them on. Some thieves hung out there, and you know this was a queer bar."
In the days that followed, other churches refused to allow survivors to hold a memorial service for the victims on their premises. Catholics, Lutherans, and Baptists all said no.
William "Father Bill" Richardson, the closeted rector of St. George's Episcopal Church, agreed to allow a small prayer service to be held on Monday evening. It was advertised only by word of mouth and drew about 80 mourners. The next day, Richardson was rebuked by Iveson Noland, the Episcopalian bishop of New Orleans, who forbade him to let the church be used again. Bishop Nolan said he had received over 100 angry phone calls from local parishioners, and Richardson's mailbox would later fill with hate letters.
Eventually, two additional ministers offered their sanctuaries – a Unitarian church, and St. Mark's United Methodist Church in the French Quarter. It was here that a July 1 memorial service was held attended by 250 people, including the state's Methodist bishop, Finis Crutchfield, who would die of AIDS fourteen years later at age 70.
Although called on to do so, no elected officials in all of Louisiana issued statements of sympathy or mourning. Even more stunning, some families refused to claim the bodies of their dead sons, too ashamed to admit they might be gay. The city would not release the remains of four unidentified persons for burial by the surviving MCC congregation members. They were dumped in mass graves at Potter's Field, New Orleans' pauper cemetery. No one was ever charged with the crime, and it remains unsolved.
Thirty-five years from now, let's hope we look back and wonder what the fuss over gay marriage was all about. But history won't remember anti-gay bigots kindly, whether they were cowardly murderers like the unknown arsonist who firebombed the UpStairs Lounge in 1973, the people of New Orleans who callously disregarded a fire that took 32 of their fellow citizens' lives because it happened at a gay bar, or today's misguided opponents of same-sex marriage.
Much of the research for this post came from Out for Good: The Struggle to Build a Gay Civil Rights Movement in America (1999), by Dudley Clendinen and Adam Nagourney, and James Thomas Sears' book Rebels, Rubyfruit, and Rhinestones: Queering Space in the Stonewall South (2001). Thanks also to Nashville writer Cole Wakefield for making news footage of the fire available on YouTube.
Special thanks to New Orleans community historian Robert Rickey, author of a recent University of New Orleans paper on the UpStairs Lounge tragedy, "Fear and Loathing in the City that Forgot to Care," for taking most of the photos included here.
In Memory (List of victims from The UpStairs Fire: 25th Memorial Service)
Partners Joe William Bailey & Clarence Josephy McCloskey, Jr. perished together. McCloskey's sisters and two nieces attended the Memorial Service. His niece, Susan, represented McCloskey in the Jazz Funeral.
Duane George "Mitch" Mitchell, assistant MCC pastor. He had escaped through the emergency exit with a group led by bartender Douglas "Buddy" Rasmussen, but ran back into the burning building trying to save his partner, Louis Horace Broussard. Their bodies were discovered lying together.
Mrs. Willie Inez Warren of Pensacola later died from burns suffered in the fire. Her two sons died inside the bar, Eddie Hosea Warren and James Curtis Warren.
Pastor of the MCC, Rev. William R. Larson, formerly a Methodist lay minister.
Dr. Perry Lane Waters, Jr., a Jefferson Parish dentist. Several victims were his patients and were identified by his x-rays.
Douglas Maxwell Williams
Leon Richard Maples, a visitor from Florida.
George Steven Matyi
Larry Stratton
Reginald Adams, Jr., MCC member, formerly a Jesuit Scholastic. Partner of entertainer Regina Adams.
James Walls Hambrick, who had jumped from the building in flames, died later that week.
Horace "Skip" Getchell, MCC member.
Joseph Henry Adams
Herbert Dean Cooley, UpStairs Lounge bartender and MCC member.
Professional pianist, David Stuart Gary.
Guy D. Anderson
Luther Boggs, teacher, who died two weeks later. Notified while hospitalized with terrible burns that he had been fired from his job.
Donald Walter Dunbar
Professional linguist, Adam Roland Fontenot, survived by his partner, bartender Douglas "Buddy" Rasmussen, who led a group to safety.
John Thomas Golding, Sr., member of MCC Pastor's Advisory Group.
Gerald Hoyt Gordon
Kenneth Paul Harrington, Federal Government employee.
Glenn Richard "Dick" Green, Navy veteran.
Robert "Bob" Lumpkin
Four men were buried in Potter's Field: Ferris LeBlanc (later indentified), and three persons only identified as Unknown White Males. The city refused to release these bodies to the MCC for burial.
A sidewalk memorial plaque now rests outside the building, dedicated on the fire's 30th anniversary in 2003.
4 comments:
I don't know if the Ferris LeBlanc in the upstairs fire in New Orleans was my uncle or not. I do know he was a WWII veteran surviving the Battle of the Bulge. Being gay he didn't survive, whether in this fire or not. When his family was enlightened, he couldn't face them and never knew we would have accepted him. So, rest in peace, dear uncle, we loved you.
- November 14, 2009 at 2:40 AM
I was a young bride living in New Orleans when this happened. This horible photo splashed across the front page of both The Times-Picayune and The States-Item shook me to my core. I still remember how sick I felt, that there was someone in my beloved city who could commit this crime...and that the city officials were so coldly indifferent to the suffering of everyone affected by the fire. May everyone who lost thier lives there rest in peace.
- January 9, 2010 at 9:55 PM
- still seeking, believing, hoplng said...
i am starting a facebook page about the fire, for family members and others who care.search the upstairs longe n.o. part 2.
?Tara - April 5, 2012 at 9:55 PM
- Skip Bailey said...
Ferris LeBlanc was my uncle and yes 'anonymous' that is him. He disappeared from our family not because he was gay, but because his partner had ripped off family members and Ferris disappeared due to shame and guilt. If we had known where he was or what happened to him we would have brought his body home. Some of us are going to New Orleans now that we know what happened, to try and find answers and do something about his burial situation. We also want to tell his story, so he is not remembered as the only identified victim left alone.
Skip - January 15, 2015 at 5:08 PM
All Posts by Category
Even More Outrage via Leftweets.org


text:
patterns > Allyson Dykhuizen Designs
> The Loop Entrelac Tank Top
The Loop Entrelac Tank Top
Need help with entrelac? I made an entrelac strap how to video: http://www.thesweatshopoflove.com/blog/2011/05/30/the-loo...
This pattern is part of The Sweatshop of Love Summer Tour 2010 Ebook of Knitting Patterns!
When I had a big girl job in The Loop in downtown Chicago, I had to dress all fancy every day. This was especially challenging in the summer, going from a non-air conditioned apartment, to an over-air conditioned train car, to the sweltering city streets, to an over-air conditioned office, and back again. I'd look for little shirts that look great standing alone but that could also be worn under a suit coat.
The Loop Entrelac Top is a classy summer top you can take from day to evening, or, more importantly, from inside to outside in the heat, by just losing your blazer. The entrelac straps are knit first, with or without contrasting color strips. Stitches are picked up for the contrasting color bands, and then again for the front tummy panel. Back is worked separately, ribbed top to help with fitting, then increased out to give the bottom of the top some swing. A single crocheted bottom edging prevents curing. Clever construction, lightweight cotton knit in a larger than recommended gauge, swing bottom: Everything designed to keep you cool this summer.
1560 projects
stashed 938 times
- First published: June 2010
- Page created: May 31, 2010
- Last updated: January 7, 2020 …
- visits in the last 24 hours
- visitors right now


text:
If you've been a conservative who has ever spoken his or her mind about our current president, you've undoubtedly been treated to the mindless, knee jerk reaction of a dull witted liberal (but I repeat myself), that the only reason you oppose Barack Obama is 'because he's black'. The recent 20 year anniversary of the slow moving, white Bronco (no, not John Elway!*), got me to thinking about O.J. Simpson. OJ was a very popular fellow. A football star in college, OJ played in the NFL for nine years: eight with the Buffalo Bills, one with the S.F. 49er's. He won the Heisman Trophy, among other awards, played in 6 NFL Pro Bowls, was drafted into the Pro Football Hall of Fame, became a commentator on Monday Night Football, acted and starred in numerous motion pictures...oh, and did I mention that OJ is black??? I only mention that, insomuch, that I don't think of OJ as a "black" NFL player, a "black" actor or a "black" murderer, any more than I think of George Hamilton as a "chestnut brown" actor or John Boehner as the "orange" Speaker of the House. Their race and color is irrelevant.
So, here's OJ, a black man, a household name in most of America, well liked and popular, whose star was eclipsed suddenly because of something that he allegedly did. It wasn't his race that people took exception with, it was his actions, or at least those that people imagined he did.
Why can't you modern liberals conceivably apply the same standard to the OJ of the Oval Office? Conservatives oppose the exact same policies when espoused by Joe Biden, Nancy Pelosi, and Harry Reid and they are white, orange and gray, respectively. Still, the same old, tired canard about race pops up in nearly every discussion. Can't we just 'cut to the chase', as it were, and get to the part where you have absolutely no argument apart from the race card? It would save ever so much time and then we could reserve the term "racist" for those few despicable folk who truly deserve it, and not just people who disagree with you politically.
The OJ of the Oval Office
Original art by John Cox. More at John Cox Art
Cross posted at LCR, Political Clown Parade
*BTW, He still hates that joke!


text:
The Allerton Apartment complex at Kent State provided one last service to the Kent community prior to demolition of the retired buildings. On Oct. 10, the Kent Fire Department started conducting field-training exercises, known as "live burns," in the cleared-out buildings.
"By the good grace of Kent State University, we've been able to use these buildings that will provide invaluable training and a chance to fight live fire," says Lt. Dave Moore of the Kent Fire Department. "This is a good environment to conduct good training."
Todd Shaffer, construction manager for Kent State University, says when a fire department sets a predetermined fire to combustible materials, such as wood and straw, that's a "live burn." With the help of an accelerant like gasoline, the fire gives firefighters the experience of coming into contact with real fire conditions, such as heat and smoke. They control the rate of burn and have a safety crew standing by to extinguish if needed. A live burn is held in an abandoned building to mimic real-life scenarios and surroundings. The Allerton Apartment complex represents hotel and residence hall scenarios.
"This is an opportunity for staff and the university to offer another learning opportunity to the community and help the fire department train and be safer," Shaffer says. "The fire department contacted me about burning vacant buildings six or seven years ago. We tried to fill out the paperwork, but it was too restricted. I contacted them about the Allerton Apartments, and this time it worked out."
Moore says that there are several guidelines, especially for safety, that must be met prior to conducting this type of training. Due to policies of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), there are, at times, "lots of hoops to jump through." Moore gratefully notes the university was able to handle the paperwork so the fire department could focus primarily on safety guidelines.
"We have safety standards, strictly from the fire department and the fire service, that we must meet that are primarily for the safety of our firefighters," Moore says. "We start off with walkthroughs before moving into the live burns. We also do accountability checks before and after every training exercise."
Though the training exercises are controlled and take place in a controlled environment, safety is of upmost importance not only to the firefighters but to the surrounding areas as well. Due to the location of Allerton Apartments, smoke from the fires is not likely to travel to nearby neighborhoods; however, the control and reduction of the smoke is still a top priority.
"One of our main goals is to follow as many guidelines and procedures so that we will be allowed to burn again," notes Moore. "It was gracious enough for Kent State to allow us to do this, and we don't want to negatively affect anyone."
The live burn training exercises are scheduled to take place over several weeks.


text:
Tekken Card Tournament
- Fighting Game
- Freemium • Proprietary
- Android
- iPhone
- Android Tablet
- iPad
What is Tekken Card Tournament?
Tekken (series) goes free-to-play for the first time ever with TEKKEN CARD TOURNAMENT. Now players can take TEKKEN with them everywhere and launch into card battles with skill-matched players from around the world.
TEKKEN CARD TOURNAMENT features the stunning 3D visuals players expect from TEKKEN, with electrifying turn-based card battling that's fun right from the start and loaded with satisfying depth. The launch of the physical TEKKEN CARD TOURNAMENT Game Cards early summer 2013 will bring real-world crossover to the gameplay, with unique QR codes letting players instantly add the card to their digital deck in-game, and Augmented Reality to bring the characters to life in players' environments. Now players can give their TEKKEN iron fist a workout anytime, anywhere.
DEEP GAMEPLAY: Customise your deck, use the fusion system to create new cards, and perfect your strategic combinations of Focus, Strike and Block moves to take down opponents.
AMAZING VISUALS: High quality, liquid smooth 3D graphics faithful to the TEKKEN universe and faultlessly rendered in the app.
UNLIMITED ACTION: Train in solo play then challenge matched opponents around the world to climb the global rankings, with extra rewards to win in themed contests and weekly battles.
COLLECTIBLE CARDS: Over 190 real-world collectible Game Cards coming to retailers early summer 2013, featuring Augmented Reality and unique QR code functionality to enhance the in-game experience.
Tekken Card Tournament Desktop Screenshots and Videos
Tekken Card Tournament Features
Tekken Card Tournament information
Supported Languages
- English
Comments and Reviews
- Fighting Game
GamesRecent user activities on Tekken Card Tournament
- Mauricio B. Holguin added Tekken Card Tournament as alternative(s) to ARMS
- David added Tekken Card Tournament as alternative(s) to Skullgirls
- David added Tekken Card Tournament as alternative(s) to Shadow Fight